Approved For Release 2003/10/10 :CIA-RDP64B00346R000200200006-6 Z`HE SPECIAL ISSUE JUNE 24, 1961 .. 25c THE by Fred J. Cook Approved For Release 2003/10/10 :CIA-RDP64B00346R000200200006-6 Approved For Release 2003/10/10 :CIA-RDP64B00346R000200200006-6 LETTERS One S~ii~1~ Act for P`~ace Dear Si~l?s: In a letter in the Junc 10 issue, re Mary Groolns's article on shel- ters [May 13], Robert Berkowitz com- ments: "I am not certain if she re- gards tf~c _ United States as Elio only warlike agent in the world." Perhaps Itlr. Berkowitz will find it less incon- ccivable that anyone could so regard us (or rather, our government) after he has read Mr. Dreher's eye-opening article, "Hazards of Civi[ Defense," in ,the same issue in which his letter ap- 'pearCd. 13 tit 171 any C:LSe, may I StlggeSt to him that all that really matters is whether the United States is one of the warlike agents in the world. I think the record clearly shows it is, and that as such it is one of the parties responsihle for imperiling the very existence of the human race. I also think that if just one of the main warlike agents in to- day's world were to begin acting in such a way as to further-and not mere- ly praise-peace, the threat which nu- clear weapons pose to mankind wouid be lessened far out of proportion to the initial act for peace, because that :ict would finaly reverse the horrible ttrn~ of the arms race. BLOSSO1vI D. SEGAf.OFF NEw Ha-ven, Coatll. Familiar .Ar~unlcnt? Dear Sirr: William Gilman, revle~ ing The Structure of Science in yottf ~iinc 10 issue, asks: ". .Can we then all- soIve the Los Alamos scientists of tiicir share of responsibility for I-Iirosfiii~a:" The answer is Yes, because (a) we n-erc at war; (h) without Iiiroshima, flit war would have continued for two riiorc years and 2 million more Americans would have died; (c) far more Japanese lives, as well as property, would have been wiped out with a contihuatioii of the war; (d) a leading Japanese states- man said if conditions had been r'eccrs~eit, he would have had no hesitalic}' in using flit bomb against America. Chicago, Ill. RUBBRT Ros>;NSLUrrI l~e~ri'.9SI~Te ~aA ? Dear Sirr: In your May 13 issue, Petcx Donner presented the case for a tax on the advertising of large companies. Mr. Donner assumes that (1) as wealth grows, the demand for an increasing number of consumer goods "reaches :1 StaCC Of CXt.rC1nC 111C1aSt1Clty" and (~) fines, by product differentiation and urge advertising expenditures, can pass Approved For Release 2003/10/10 .CIA-RDP64B00346R~Cf'1fb'~2~~1~ Snninter .Schedule After Ju.l.y 1, and through lAtl~*llSt, T'lie 1Vatiort, will ap= ti~ir ari alternate weeks aiily, i.e.~ oii July l~ and 2~, aaid Ang>1>!st 12 and 2b. The no1?uial weekly sched- ule wi)1 be resii;tued with the Sept. 2 issue. along cost increases to the consunlcr. When demand is in "a state of cx- trcme inelasticity," the firm is in a po- sition to pass increases in host along to the tonstttricr with the rl'slft that prices arc Ilighci? .and the quantity sold is about the saint: To the film, a tax oii advertising is an increase in Elie cast of dola~ busi- ness. If the tat can be forced tin the consttiiicc iri tlic form o~ higher prices, then its economic impact is identical to that of a sales tax. A sacs tax is a rcgressi~?c tax. If one grants Mr. Donner his as- sumptions, one is confronted with a t:ix on advertisilg that is paid by the coilsunler under a s'ystein of regressive taxation. Suppose that the volume bf advertising does ilccrease. What tviil disappear? Will thct~ ~~ less I'ld_v of file YI'eek or will tlietc be Icss Guli- 597t;O~E? Most of flit effects that Mr. Dorifcr is seeking could, pcriiaps, be liettcr aci,leved through a system of grading and labeling of advt;rtiscd products and by a closer Look :it adve?tisirig material by flit FTC. Z7iis

plus-circle Add Review

comment

Reviews